Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://repository.monashhealth.org/monashhealthjspui/handle/1/40462
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBabl F.E.en
dc.contributor.authorOakley E.en
dc.contributor.authorBata S.en
dc.contributor.authorRengasamy S.en
dc.contributor.authorKrieser D.en
dc.contributor.authorCheek J.en
dc.contributor.authorJachno K.en
dc.date.accessioned2021-05-14T13:50:23Zen
dc.date.available2021-05-14T13:50:23Zen
dc.date.copyright2016en
dc.date.created20161117en
dc.date.issued2016-11-23en
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Pediatrics. 178 (pp 241-245.e1), 2016. Date of Publication: 01 Nov 2016.en
dc.identifier.issn0022-3476en
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.monashhealth.org/monashhealthjspui/handle/1/40462en
dc.description.abstractObjectives To determine whether nasogastric hydration can be used in infants less than 2 months of age with bronchiolitis, and characterize the adverse events profile of these infants compared with infants given intravenous (IV) fluid hydration. Study design A descriptive retrospective cohort study of children with bronchiolitis under 2 months of age admitted for hydration at 3 centers over 3 bronchiolitis seasons was done. We determined type of hydration (nasogastric vs IV fluid hydration) and adverse events, intensive care unit admission, and respiratory support. Results Of 491 infants under 2 months of age admitted with bronchiolitis, 211 (43%) received nonoral hydration: 146 (69%) via nasogastric hydration and 65 (31%) via IV fluid hydration. Adverse events occurred in 27.4% (nasogastric hydration) and 23.1% (IV fluid hydration), difference of 4.3%; 95%CI (-8.2 to 16.9), P=.51. The majority of adverse events were desaturations (21.9% nasogastric hydration vs 21.5% IV fluid hydration, difference 0.4%; [-11.7 to 12.4], P=.95). There were no pulmonary aspirations in either group. Apneas and bradycardias were similar in each group. IV fluid hydration use was positively associated with intensive care unit admission (38.5% IV fluid hydration vs 19.9% nasogastric hydration; difference 18.6%, [5.1-32.1], P=.004); and use of ventilation support (27.7% IV fluid hydration vs 15.1% nasogastric hydration; difference 12.6 [0.3-23], P=.03). Fewer infants changed from nasogastric hydration to IV fluid hydration than from IV fluid hydration to nasogastric hydration (12.3% vs 47.7%; difference -35.4% [-49 to -22], P<.001). Conclusions Nasogastric hydration can be used in the majority of young infants admitted with bronchiolitis. Nasogastric hydration and IV fluid hydration had similar rates of complications.Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc.en
dc.languageenen
dc.languageEnglishen
dc.publisherMosby Inc. (E-mail: customerservice@mosby.com)en
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Pediatricsen
dc.titleNasogastric Hydration in Infants with Bronchiolitis Less Than 2 Months of Age.en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.affiliationEmergency Medicineen
dc.type.studyortrialObservational study (cohort, case-control, cross sectional or survey)-
dc.identifier.doihttp://monash.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2016.07.012en
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen
dc.identifier.pubmedid27522439 [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=27522439]en
dc.identifier.source613140886en
dc.identifier.institution(Oakley, Bata, Rengasamy, Babl) Department of Emergency Medicine, Royal Children's Hospital Victoria, Parkville, Victoria, Australia (Krieser) Department of Emergency Medicine and Pediatrics, Sunshine Hospital, St Albans, Victoria, Australia (Cheek) Department of Emergency Medicine, Monash Medical Centre, Clayton, Victoria, Australia (Jachno) Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics Unit, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australiaen
dc.description.addressE. Oakley, Royal Children's Hospital Victoria, Parkville, Victoria, Australia. E-mail: ed.oakley@rch.org.auen
dc.description.publicationstatusEmbaseen
dc.rights.statementCopyright 2016 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.en
dc.subect.keywordsbronchiolitis hydration respiratory syncytial virusen
dc.identifier.authoremailOakley E.; ed.oakley@rch.org.auen
dc.identifier.affiliationext(Oakley, Bata, Rengasamy, Babl) Department of Emergency Medicine, Royal Children's Hospital Victoria, Parkville, Victoria, Australia-
dc.identifier.affiliationext(Krieser) Department of Emergency Medicine and Pediatrics, Sunshine Hospital, St Albans, Victoria, Australia-
dc.identifier.affiliationext(Jachno) Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics Unit, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia-
dc.identifier.affiliationmh(Cheek) Department of Emergency Medicine, Monash Medical Centre, Clayton, Victoria, Australia-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.openairetypeArticle-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
Appears in Collections:Articles
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

44
checked on Feb 11, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in Monash Health Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.